Quote:
Originally Posted by StoppedRainingMen
we've definitely arrived at the point where roto or not in a standard 5x5 if you think drafting more than 1 pitcher is the first 10 rounds is a practical idea you're wrong. no matter what you say or what you think you're wrong. if you're going to come up with a counterpoint to my post, you're wrong
yes, a thames or a judge or a story last year or a trout his rookie year etc etc etc will fall through the cracks but that's a lot rarer than being able to take an great to potentially elite pitcher late or after the draft altogether. guys like nova and paxton, bundy, severino, triggs, deverinski etc etc etc etc etc will always be there to shore off a staff. ya the names don't sound as safe as a scherzer or a sale or madbum, who cares. if you're paying attention assembling a good to great pitching staff just based on misfit toys is so much easier than doing that for hitting
I'm still not sold on this. Draft rankings are based on replacement value versus waiver wire, and pitchers like Scherzer etc are sky high in that regard. In my view, mid round pitchers (ADP 100-200) have really questionable value and are far more likely to be dropped due to poor performance than peer hitters.
The core issue is that typical rosters go a lot deeper into MLB batters than they do pitchers. In a typical 12-man league, about ~170 of 240 total everyday batters will be drafted/owned at any point in time, while about 80 out of 150 pitchers on rotation will be owned. It's really, really likely that out of the ~50% of pitchers who are unowned you'll be able to find several gems about to perform in the top 20% of SPs. But a lot less likely in the ~30% of hitters who are unowned.
To me the issue affects the first 10 rounds a lot less than it does the next 10 rounds. When I look back at rounds 10-20 and the pitchers drafted, it always seems to be littered with busts.